Search RPD Archives
[rpd] Fwd: [arin-ppml] Draft Policy ARIN-2016-6: Eliminate HD-Ratio from NRPM
ernest at afrinic.net
Wed Jul 27 09:28:21 UTC 2016
FYI - This proposal in the ARIN region could be of interest to us,
as it seeks to eliminate the HD-ratio from the IPv6 allocation policy.
Draft Policy ARIN-2016-6: Eliminate HD-Ratio from NRPM
Date: 26 July 2016
The HD-Ratio has become an anachronism in the NRPM and some of the
vestigial references to it create confusion about recommended prefix
sizes for IPv6 resulting in a belief in the community that ARIN
the idea of /56s as a unit of measure in IPv6 assignments. While there
are members of the community that believe a /56 is a reasonable choice,
ARIN policy has always allowed and still supports /48 prefixes for any
and all end-sites without need for further justification. More
restrictive choices are still permitted under policy as well. This
proposal does not change that, but it attempts to eliminate some
The last remaining vestigial references to HD-Ratio are contained in
community networks policy (Section 6.5.9). This policy seeks to replace
6.5.9 with new text incorporating end user policy by reference (roughly
equivalent to the original intent of 6.5.9 prior to the more recent
changes to end-user policy). While this contains a substantial rewrite
to the Community Networks policy, it will not have any negative impact
on community networks. It may increase the amount of IPv6 space a
community network could receive due to the change from HD-Ratio, but
more than any other similar sized end-user would receive under existing
Replace section 6.5.9 in its entirety as follows:
6.5.9 Community Network Assignments
While community networks would normally be considered to be ISP type
organizations under existing ARIN criteria, they tend to operate on
tighter budgets and often depend on volunteer labor. As a result, they
tend to be much smaller and more communal in their organization rather
than provider/customer relationships of commercial ISPs. This section
seeks to provide policy that is more friendly to those environments by
allowing them to use end-user criteria. 188.8.131.52 Qualification Criteria
To qualify under this section, a community network must demonstrate to
ARIN’s satisfaction that it meets the definition of a community network
under section 2.11 of the NRPM. 184.108.40.206 Receiving Resources
Once qualified under this section, a community network shall be treated
as an end-user assignment for all ARIN purposes (both policy and fee
structure) unless or until the board adopts a specific more favorable
fee structure for community networks.
Community networks shall be eligible under this section only for IPv6
resources and the application process and use of those resources shall
be governed by the existing end-user policy contained in section 6.5.8
Community networks seeking other resources shall remain subject to the
policies governing those resources independent of their election to use
this policy for IPv6 resources.
Delete section 2.8 — This section is non-operative and conflicts with
the definitions of utilization contained in current policies.
Delete section 2.9 — This section is no longer operative.
Delete section 6.7 — This section is no longer applicable.
Timetable for implementation: Immediate
Originally, I thought this would be an editorial change as the HD-Ratio
has been unused for several years.
However, further research revealed that it is still referenced in the
Community Networks policy which has also gone unused since its
inception. As a result, I am going to attempt to simultaneously
the Community Networks policy while preserving its intent and eliminate
the HD-Ratio from the NRPM.
I realize that fees are out of scope for policy, however, in this case,
we are not setting fees. We are addressing in policy which fee
the given policy should operate under in a manner which does not
constrain board action on actual fees.
This is an attempt to preserve the original intent of the Community
networks policy in a way that may make it less vestigial.
Alternatively, we could simply delete Section 6.5.9 if that is
preferred. The primary goal here is to get rid of vestigial
HD-Ratio rather than to get wrapped around the axle on community
More information about the RPD